User talk:Warmachine375
Grammar Edits Hi Warmachine. This wiki has a naming policy, in essence, unit names (such as purifier) don't use capital letters, unless they're a vehicle. You've been making a lot of grammar edits, but sometimes they don't make things better. For instance, you changed "Purifier attacking Nova with a continuous beam attack" to "Purifier attacking Nova with a continuous beam attack's'" which is actually wrong. (You can't have a''' continuous beam attack'''s.) I've noticed similar minor errors in some of the grammar edits. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 15:52, May 27, 2012 (UTC) :Sorry about that,well what other errors I made PSH? Just remind me of the wiki policies because I really don't know to make article links and adding photos on this one. This type of editing is a bit more complicated than other wikias I joined and edited which were easy. ::Wiki policies can be found in category: help. Making article links is easy, just put in link, just like any other wiki (except TVTropes, that is). Adding images is hard, and it's supposed to be that way. You should use Special:Upload, although there's an Add Photo button too. Both let you upload an image. You can (and should) name the image something descriptive. ::Both methods give you the option to adding text to the image file, and that needs to be done. Add the source at the very least. There's also info that needs to be added about copyrights and categorization, but that's less of an issue, since administrators can add that themselves. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 01:44, May 28, 2012 (UTC) :::When Meco reverts an edit, he always includes a reason in the edit summary. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 22:38, May 28, 2012 (UTC) You are adding unnecessary verbosity and hyperbole. Do stop doing that. - Meco (talk, ) 06:40, June 1, 2012 (UTC) Alright (2x), I'll quit doing that! - User:Warmachine375 Review the nouns usage policy before editing further. Avoid adding hyperbole: they rarely not enhance the tone of presentation. Avoid phrases like "they then": this typically adds only verbosity. Unless it is not clear by now, edits that are reverted typically indicate things '' not to do''. - Meco (talk, ) 15:49, June 29, 2012 (UTC) Use the edit summary From this time forward, use the "Edit Summary" field to justify your edits. Especially the ones where you are tacking on words that add little to clarity or content ("adding verbosity"). The summaries better "make sense". I will be issuing blocks if you do not make those summaries and, further down the line, if your edits do not improve. If you are confused why your edits are being reverted, do ask for clarification. Your talk page is very good for this. - Meco (talk, ) 17:22, July 4, 2012 (UTC) Still no improvement. And since still no edit summaries from you, welcome to your second block. - Meco (talk, ) 09:51, August 28, 2012 (UTC) Thanks for the second block Meco! No hard feelings.--Warmachine375 (talk) 09:57, August 28, 2012 (UTC) Let me out already! It's been too long being blocked here! --Warmachine375 (talk) 10:57, June 3, 2013 (UTC) The next time I block you will be permanent. Going by the lackluster edits you've been making on other wikis and this one (using sockpuppets and all) I expect this to happen very soon. - Meco (talk, ) 22:04, August 3, 2013 (UTC) Wow! you sound like the tyrannical Emperor Mengsk and I'm the Jim Raynor you threatened to be brought to justice very soon. No offense. And what do mean sockpuppets? I don't know any of them, maybe it's some other random guys who edit as bad as I am. --Warmachine375 (talk) 07:40, August 4, 2013 (UTC) My statement was not idle speculation. You have been a problem user (via anon IPs) since before you started using this account on this wiki. Afterward you used anon IPs to evade account blocks, and we would have seen more of this recently had I not taken steps to restrict that. This is on top of over 1.5 years (and counting) of poor quality edits from you. Even worse, this behavior is not isolated to this wiki. For one who was on as thin ice as you, it was an error to reply with a bald-faced lie. Even one of your characteristic non-replies would have been better. I had held out a very faint, extremely irrational, hope that we might expect something better from you in the future. I had hoped that that last warning would be sufficient inducement for positive change; this too was a faint and irrational hope given the lack of change despite a slew of encounters you've had with admins in the past (again, looking at other wikis). Your lie has succeeded in destroying that hope, and removing the last inhibitions I had to issuing the aforementioned perma-block. - Meco (talk, ) 20:04, August 5, 2013 (UTC) Hey! You didn't give me time to reply because the internet is slow in my house! And I didn't lie and I said that there are others out there who edit bad as I am and I'm not the only who does it! Blocking me proves that you are as tyrannical and evil as Mengsk!--Warmachine375 (talk) 02:40, August 6, 2013 (UTC) Mods It's okay to make articles about mods, but they have to use the Fan templates and there's restrictions about how much info those articles can have. A really large mod should have its own wiki. PSH aka Kimera 757 (talk) ) 03:47, July 21, 2012 (UTC) :Also note that mods should only have articles if they've been acknowledged by Blizzard and/or an impartial source.--Hawki (talk) 03:50, July 21, 2012 (UTC) Sweet! So are there any articles about them now?